Third Party candidates do not win the presidency. Not even come close. Even a person as popular as Teddy Roosevelt could not win it. A vote for a Third Party candidate is a vote in essence wasted and will result in a Republican win.

@jorj Which is better for the common man...Republicans or Liberals albeit some tainted by corporate money?

@dahermit which is why Bernie runs as a Democrat. He understands that is the only way to win & the only way to create change. Work from within instead of complainig about how bad the 2 main parties are.

@Heidi68 As far as I know, Bernie still lists himself as an "Independent", not a "Democrat". Which is in my opinion a mistake on his part. He is the only one (except for Elizabeth Warren), that understands the central issued is the despararency of the income of the working class to that of the ultra rich. In short, in order to win, Bernie needs the resources of the Democratic Party behind him.

@dahermit he runs as a Democrat until he receives the win and the he turns down their nomination. Look back at his history in New Hampshire.

@dahermit, @jorj you really need to learn to research outside of the republican lie chamber. No matter what happened within the DNC Bernie still lost the votes. Period.
And he has more sense than to align himself with Stein. She had no platform. She was going for middle of the road hoping both HRC & Bernie were too left and tRump was too right.

@jorj whatever are you talking about? In both of the above statements, you must be getting confused. What made up talking point are you talking about?. Within this whole thread I have only gone back to the previous election. Where exactly are you getting 20+ year talking points? You have yet to state one single thing other than 3rd party hate. No proof, just hate of the current system.
As I stated on the other thread - we have many young enthusiastic mostly Democrats running who could change many of the things most 3rd party people are interested in but you, yes you, are so filled with hate you won't open your eyes to the possibilities right in front of you.

@jorj when have I talked down to you? You are the one calling yourself names. You are the one typing confusing statements. I did ask specific questions - what are you talking about 20 year old talking points - when everything I have discussed has been from the last election. Go back & reread both of the threads...

@jorj seriously - you need put your big boy pants on - you want me to attack you I will but I have not up to this point.
The first comment on this thread between the 2 of us was you attacking me on Bernie. And then you squalling about echo chambers - one comment it is fox news & republican then it is Democrat echo chambers. Please put down whatever you are smoking or drinking and come back when you are sober. Until you can make coherent comments I am done with you. Have a good night.

I respect your Green Party choice, I'm an environmentalist, but I will place my vote for the candidate with the highest potential to unseat Trump. I prefer Elizabeth Warren and think she will prevail in the end..

I live in Massachusetts, and even though I’ve always voted Democrat I’m torn in the upcoming gubernatorial race, because I think that our very popular middle-of-the-road Republican governor Charlie Baker is a strong, rational choice for re-election... I will have to learn a lot more about his opponent before I decide!

@JustLynnie If everyone has that mentality then yes they will not win.

Hillary running again would literally be the end of the democratic party. How many times do they think they can force a choice we clearly don't want down our throat.

No law against it, lets hope

The incumbent usually runs for the presidency unopposed by his or her party in the modern era. Party solidarity and all that hogwash. I don't think it's happened since 1992, but I could be wrong. It is possible though.

@Lincoln55 Clearly, if all these people were running for the nomination I would look into their voting records and listen to their speeches to decide who the best candidate would be. But I'm not going to do hours of online research for a fucking website poll that doesn't mean shit. You don't know shit about me to say that I "don't give a rats ass about politics" and that I'm "brain dead." Why do a lot people comment on anything on this website? To have great conversations, to share common interests and ideas, and to get useless internet points to so we can get to another level and get a free shirt. That's the main reason I commented. What made you want to insult a complete stranger online? That's very Trump-ish of you. Just curious, Lincoln.
Also, whoopdeedoo! You've been to Rome, GA and know about it's political atmosphere! Who cares? Rome, GA is a conservative town in a conservative state. No matter how many elections I vote liberal or Democrat, nothing ever changes. I have to put up with a lot of Trump supporter shit here, so with all due respect, fuck off!

Sanders is only one year older than Biden, just sayin'.

@Dietl I'm 75...I can attest that 80's is way too old to be president. Bernie is still sharp, Biden never talks about how the the country has become an oligarchy of the rich via Republican control...he is not smart enough to see it whereas Elizabeth Warren gets it.

@dahermit
Just so you know, I agree with you. It is perfectly legitimate to question someones suitability for the office because of their age. But I wanted to point out that the same critizism applies to other candidates. Trump was 70, which is the oldest president at the time of the election. Biden now is 75, Bernie 76 and even Elizabeth Warren is 69. Either one of the top voted democrats (except for Harris at 53) would break the current record in 2020.

I would concede that Obama and the Democrats did not fight nearly enough and gave up too much (not the least of which was the cost control in Obamacare that could have made it work).

I too really liked Warren....but only until she backed Hillery. I then left the Democratic Party. I was always an Independent anyways.

@Reignmond Yeah it seems as much as a working taxpayer wants to support the Dems, they disappoint. Reminds me of Lucy, Charlie Brown & the football. Sad.

I understand your frustration with Obama. Especially when there was the perception that we also had control of the House and Senate.Thing is a lot of Dems are actually controlled by weird religious and economic beliefs like the RepubliCONS.
2nd. I believe Obama also feels strongly that it's not just wining that counts, but also how you win.
Truth, honor and respectful differences matter. It has been no match for the evil the RepubliCONs are willing to embrace but this too can change. The RepubliCONS are trying to control the people with a dumbed down education system. Economics that keep the dumb poor.
To fight this we need charismatic, smart leaders.
Bernie and Elizabeth are not charismatic. They are not great speakers. There intentions are good and make good team players but IMHO we need more Obama types.

@twill I actually am pushing for major changes to a system of Democracy (please don't harp that it is a Republic...the later is a species of the former). One of the things I want is the elimination of all Political Parties, and elections to be held by a process of elimination (like playoffs). Parties enable the consolidation of influence and power that promotes corruption. They also truncate the selection of means by which we may try to solve our problems. Parties were a necessity in the pre-21st century, but now they are a detriment.

@Duago Yes if Dems were on the other side of religious issue, then churches woudl be paying some taxes, and the rest of us would not be funding their wars